scholarly journals Isolation and contact tracing can tip the scale to containment of COVID-19 in populations with social distancing

Author(s):  
Mirjam E. Kretzschmar ◽  
Ganna Rozhnova ◽  
Michiel van Boven

AbstractBackgroundNovel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has extended its range of transmission in all parts of the world, with substantial variation in rates of transmission and severity of associated disease. Many countries have implemented social distancing as a measure to control further spread.MethodsWe evaluate whether and under which conditions containment or slowing down COVID-19 epidemics are possible by isolation and contact tracing in settings with various levels of social distancing. We use a stochastic transmission model in which every person generates novel infections according to a probability distribution that is affected by the incubation period distribution (time from infection to symptoms), distribution of the latent period (time from infection to onset of infectiousness), and overall transmissibility. The model distinguishes between close contacts (e.g., within a household) and other contacts in the population. Social distancing affects the number of contacts outside but not within the household.FindingsThe proportion of asymptomatic or unascertained cases has a strong impact on the controllability of the disease. If the proportion of asymptomatic infections is larger than 30%, contact tracing and isolation cannot achieve containment for an R0 of 2.5. Achieving containment by social distancing requires a reduction of numbers of non-household contacts by around 90%. Depending on the realized level of contact reduction, tracing and isolation of only household contacts, or of household and non-household contacts are necessary to reduce the effective reproduction number to below 1. A combination of social distancing with isolation and contact tracing leads to synergistic effects that increase the prospect of containment.InterpretationIsolation and contact tracing can be an effective means to slow down epidemics, but only if the majority of cases are ascertained. In a situation with social distancing, contact tracing can act synergistically and tip the scale towards containment, and can therefore be a tool for controlling COVID-19 epidemics as part of an exit strategy from current lockdown measures.FundingThis research was partly funded by ZonMw project number 91216062.Research in contextEvidence before this studyAs of 8 April 2020, the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has spread to more than 170 countries and has caused near 90,000 deaths of COVID-19 worldwide. In the absence of effective medicines and vaccines, the preventive measures are limited to social distancing, isolation of confirmed and suspected cases, and identification and quarantining of their contacts. Evidence suggests that a substantial portion of transmission may occur before the onset of symptoms and before cases can be isolated, and that many cases remain unascertained. This has potentially important implications for the prospect of containment by combinations of these measures.Added value of this studyUsing a stochastic transmission model armed with current best estimates of epidemiological parameters, we evaluated under which conditions containment could be achieved with combinations of social distancing, isolation and contact tracing. We investigated the level of social distancing needed for containment, and how an additional implementation of isolation and contact tracing may likely help to in reducing the effective reproduction number to below 1, the critical threshold. We analyzed what proportion of household and non-household contacts need to be isolated effectively to achieve containment depending on the level of social distancing in the population. We estimated the impact of combinations of these measures on epidemic growth rate and doubling time for the number of infections. We find that under realistic assumptions on the level of social distancing, additional isolation and contact tracing are needed for stopping the epidemic. Whether quarantining only household contacts is sufficient, depends on levels of social distancing and timeliness of tracing and isolation.Implications of all the available evidenceOur analyses based on best understanding of the epidemiology of COVID-19, highlight that if social distancing is not complete, isolation and contact tracing at least of household contacts can help to delay and lower the epidemic peak. High levels of timely contact tracing of household and non-household contacts may be sufficient to control the epidemic.

Science ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 368 (6498) ◽  
pp. 1481-1486 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juanjuan Zhang ◽  
Maria Litvinova ◽  
Yuxia Liang ◽  
Yan Wang ◽  
Wei Wang ◽  
...  

Intense nonpharmaceutical interventions were put in place in China to stop transmission of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). As transmission intensifies in other countries, the interplay between age, contact patterns, social distancing, susceptibility to infection, and COVID-19 dynamics remains unclear. To answer these questions, we analyze contact survey data for Wuhan and Shanghai before and during the outbreak and contact-tracing information from Hunan province. Daily contacts were reduced seven- to eightfold during the COVID-19 social distancing period, with most interactions restricted to the household. We find that children 0 to 14 years of age are less susceptible to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection than adults 15 to 64 years of age (odds ratio 0.34, 95% confidence interval 0.24 to 0.49), whereas individuals more than 65 years of age are more susceptible to infection (odds ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 1.92). Based on these data, we built a transmission model to study the impact of social distancing and school closure on transmission. We find that social distancing alone, as implemented in China during the outbreak, is sufficient to control COVID-19. Although proactive school closures cannot interrupt transmission on their own, they can reduce peak incidence by 40 to 60% and delay the epidemic.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirjam E. Kretzschmar ◽  
Ganna Rozhnova ◽  
Michiel van Boven

SARS-CoV-2 has established itself in all parts of the world, and many countries have implemented social distancing as a measure to prevent overburdening of health care systems. Here we evaluate whether and under which conditions containment of SARS-CoV-2 is possible by isolation and contact tracing in settings with various levels of social distancing. To this end we use a branching process model in which every person generates novel infections according to a probability distribution that is affected by the incubation period distribution, distribution of the latent period, and infectivity. The model distinguishes between household and non-household contacts. Social distancing may affect the numbers of the two types of contacts differently, for example while work and school contacts are reduced, household contacts may remain unchanged. The model allows for an explicit calculation of the basic and effective reproduction numbers, and of exponential growth rates and doubling times. Our findings indicate that if the proportion of asymptomatic infections in the model is larger than 30%, contact tracing and isolation cannot achieve containment for a basic reproduction number (ℛ0) of 2.5. Achieving containment by social distancing requires a reduction of numbers of non-household contacts by around 90%. If containment is not possible, at least a reduction of epidemic growth rate and an increase in doubling time may be possible. We show for various parameter combinations how growth rates can be reduced and doubling times increased by contact tracing. Depending on the realized level of contact reduction, tracing and isolation of only household contacts, or of household and non-household contacts are necessary to reduce the effective reproduction number to below 1. In a situation with social distancing, contact tracing can act synergistically to tip the scale toward containment. These measures can therefore be a tool for controlling COVID-19 epidemics as part of an exit strategy from lock-down measures or for preventing secondary waves of COVID-19.


2021 ◽  
Vol 376 (1829) ◽  
pp. 20200261
Author(s):  
Matt J. Keeling ◽  
Michael J. Tildesley ◽  
Benjamin D. Atkins ◽  
Bridget Penman ◽  
Emma Southall ◽  
...  

By mid-May 2020, cases of COVID-19 in the UK had been declining for over a month; a multi-phase emergence from lockdown was planned, including a scheduled partial reopening of schools on 1 June 2020. Although evidence suggests that children generally display mild symptoms, the size of the school-age population means the total impact of reopening schools is unclear. Here, we present work from mid-May 2020 that focused on the imminent opening of schools and consider what these results imply for future policy. We compared eight strategies for reopening primary and secondary schools in England. Modifying a transmission model fitted to UK SARS-CoV-2 data, we assessed how reopening schools affects contact patterns, anticipated secondary infections and the relative change in the reproduction number, R . We determined the associated public health impact and its sensitivity to changes in social distancing within the wider community. We predicted that reopening schools with half-sized classes or focused on younger children was unlikely to push R above one. Older children generally have more social contacts, so reopening secondary schools results in more cases than reopening primary schools, while reopening both could have pushed R above one in some regions. Reductions in community social distancing were found to outweigh and exacerbate any impacts of reopening. In particular, opening schools when the reproduction number R is already above one generates the largest increase in cases. Our work indicates that while any school reopening will result in increased mixing and infection amongst children and the wider population, reopening schools alone in June 2020 was unlikely to push R above one. Ultimately, reopening decisions are a difficult trade-off between epidemiological consequences and the emotional, educational and developmental needs of children. Into the future, there are difficult questions about what controls can be instigated such that schools can remain open if cases increase. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Modelling that shaped the early COVID-19 pandemic response in the UK’.


Author(s):  
Juanjuan Zhang ◽  
Maria Litvinova ◽  
Yuxia Liang ◽  
Yan Wang ◽  
Wei Wang ◽  
...  

AbstractStrict interventions were successful to control the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak in China. As transmission intensifies in other countries, the interplay between age, contact patterns, social distancing, susceptibility to infection and disease, and COVID-19 dynamics remains unclear. To answer these questions, we analyze contact surveys data for Wuhan and Shanghai before and during the outbreak and contact tracing information from Hunan Province. Daily contacts were reduced 7-9 fold during the COVID-19 social distancing period, with most interactions restricted to the household. Children 0-14 years were 59% (95% CI 7-82%) less susceptible than individuals 65 years and over. A transmission model calibrated against these data indicates that social distancing alone, as implemented in China during the outbreak, is sufficient to control COVID-19. While proactive school closures cannot interrupt transmission on their own, they reduce peak incidence by half and delay the epidemic. These findings can help guide global intervention policies.


Author(s):  
Ebrahim Sahafizadeh ◽  
Samaneh Sartoli

AbstractBackgroundAs reported by Iranian governments, the first cases of coronavirus (COVID-19) infections confirmed in Qom, Iran on February 19, 2020 (30 Bahman 1398). The number of identified cases afterward increased rapidly and the novel coronavirus spread to all provinces of the country. This study aimed to fit an epidemic model to the reported cases data to estimate the basic reproduction number (R0) of COVID-19 in Iran.MethodsWe used data from February 21, 2020, to April 21, 2020, on the number of cases reported by Iranian governments and we employed the SIR (Susceptible-Infectious-Removed) epidemic spreading model to fit the transmission model to the reported cases data by tuning the parameters in order to estimate the basic reproduction number of COVID-19 in Iran.ResultsThe value of reproduction number was estimated 4.86 in the first week and 4.5 in the second week. it decreased from 4.29 to 2.37 in the next four weeks. At the seventh week of the outbreak the reproduction number was reduced below one.ConclusionsThe results indicate that the basic reproduction number of COVID-19 was significantly larger than one in the early stages of the outbreak. However, implementing social distancing and preventing travelling on Nowruz (Persian New Year) effectively reduced the reproduction number. Although the results indicate that reproduction number is below one, it is necessary to continue social distancing and control travelling to prevent causing a second wave of outbreak.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jasmina Panovska-Griffiths ◽  
Cliff Kerr ◽  
Robyn Margaret Stuart ◽  
Dina Mistry ◽  
Daniel Klein ◽  
...  

Background In order to slow down the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus causing the COVID-19 pandemic, the UK government has imposed strict physical distancing (lockdown) measures including school 'dismissals' since 23 March 2020. As evidence is emerging that these measures may have slowed the spread of the pandemic, it is important to assess the impact of any changes in strategy, including scenarios for school reopening and broader relaxation of social distancing. This work uses an individual-based model to predict the impact of a suite of possible strategies to reopen schools in the UK, including that currently proposed by the UK government. Methods We use Covasim, a stochastic agent-based model for transmission of COVID-19, calibrated to the UK epidemic. The model describes individuals' contact networks stratified as household, school, work and community layers, and uses demographic and epidemiological data from the UK. We simulate a range of different school reopening strategies with a society-wide relaxation of lockdown measures and in the presence of different non-pharmaceutical interventions, to estimate the number of new infections, cumulative cases and deaths, as well as the effective reproduction number with different strategies. To account for uncertainties within the stochastic simulation, we also simulated different levels of infectiousness of children and young adults under 20 years old compared to older ages. Findings We found that with increased levels of testing of people (between 25% and 72% of symptomatic people tested at some point during an active COVID-19 infection depending on scenarios) and effective contact-tracing and isolation for infected individuals, an epidemic rebound may be prevented across all reopening scenarios, with the effective reproduction number (R) remaining below one and the cumulative number of new infections and deaths significantly lower than they would be if testing did not increase. If UK schools reopen in phases from June 2020, prevention of a second wave would require testing 51% of symptomatic infections, tracing of 40% of their contacts, and isolation of symptomatic and diagnosed cases. However, without such measures, reopening of schools together with gradual relaxing of the lockdown measures are likely to induce a secondary pandemic wave, as are other scenarios for reopening. When infectiousness of <20 year olds was varied from 100% to 50% of that of older ages, our findings remained unchanged. Interpretation To prevent a secondary COVID-19 wave, relaxation of social distancing including reopening schools in the UK must be implemented alongside an active large-scale population-wide testing of symptomatic individuals and effective tracing of their contacts, followed by isolation of symptomatic and diagnosed individuals. Such combined measures have a greater likelihood of controlling the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and preventing a large number of COVID-19 deaths than reopening schools and society with the current level of implementation of testing and isolation of infected individuals.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. e0256180
Author(s):  
Tomasz Piasecki ◽  
Piotr B. Mucha ◽  
Magdalena Rosińska

Contact tracing and quarantine are well established non-pharmaceutical epidemic control tools. The paper aims to clarify the impact of these measures in evolution of epidemic. The proposed deterministic model defines a simple rule on the reproduction number R in terms of ratio of diagnosed cases and, quarantine and transmission parameters. The model is applied to the early stage of Covid19 crisis in Poland. We investigate 3 scenarios corresponding to different ratios of diagnosed cases. Our results show that, depending on the scenario, contact tracing prevented from 50% to over 90% of cases. The effects of quarantine are limited by fraction of undiagnosed cases. The key conclusion is that under realistic assumptions the epidemic can not be controlled without any social distancing measures.


2021 ◽  
Vol 376 (1829) ◽  
pp. 20200276
Author(s):  
Ellen Brooks-Pollock ◽  
Jonathan M. Read ◽  
Angela R. McLean ◽  
Matt J. Keeling ◽  
Leon Danon

In the absence of a vaccine, severe acute respiratory syndrome–coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission has been controlled by preventing person-to-person interactions via social distancing measures. In order to re-open parts of society, policy-makers need to consider how combinations of measures will affect transmission and understand the trade-offs between them. We use age-specific social contact data, together with epidemiological data, to quantify the components of the COVID-19 reproduction number. We estimate the impact of social distancing policies on the reproduction number by turning contacts on and off based on context and age. We focus on the impact of re-opening schools against a background of wider social distancing measures. We demonstrate that pre-collected social contact data can be used to provide a time-varying estimate of the reproduction number ( R ). We find that following lockdown (when R = 0.7, 95% CI 0.6, 0.8), opening primary schools has a modest impact on transmission ( R = 0.89, 95% CI 0.82−0.97) as long as other social interactions are not increased. Opening secondary and primary schools is predicted to have a larger impact ( R = 1.22, 95% CI 1.02−1.53). Contact tracing and COVID security can be used to mitigate the impact of increased social mixing to some extent; however, social distancing measures are still required to control transmission. Our approach has been widely used by policy-makers to project the impact of social distancing measures and assess the trade-offs between them. Effective social distancing, contact tracing and COVID security are required if all age groups are to return to school while controlling transmission. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Modelling that shaped the early COVID-19 pandemic response in the UK’.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ganna Rozhnova ◽  
Christiaan H. van Dorp ◽  
Patricia Bruijning-Verhagen ◽  
Martin C. J. Bootsma ◽  
Janneke H. H. M. van de Wijgert ◽  
...  

AbstractThe role of school-based contacts in the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 is incompletely understood. We use an age-structured transmission model fitted to age-specific seroprevalence and hospital admission data to assess the effects of school-based measures at different time points during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands. Our analyses suggest that the impact of measures reducing school-based contacts depends on the remaining opportunities to reduce non-school-based contacts. If opportunities to reduce the effective reproduction number (Re) with non-school-based measures are exhausted or undesired and Re is still close to 1, the additional benefit of school-based measures may be considerable, particularly among older school children. As two examples, we demonstrate that keeping schools closed after the summer holidays in 2020, in the absence of other measures, would not have prevented the second pandemic wave in autumn 2020 but closing schools in November 2020 could have reduced Re below 1, with unchanged non-school-based contacts.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatima Khadadah ◽  
Abdullah A. Al-Shammari ◽  
Ahmad Alhashemi ◽  
Dari Alhuwail ◽  
Bader Al-Saif ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Aggressive non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) may reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2. The extent to which these interventions are successful in stopping the spread have not been characterized in countries with distinct socioeconomic groups. We compared the effects of a partial lockdown on disease transmission among Kuwaitis (P1) and non-Kuwaitis (P2) living in Kuwait. Methods We fit a modified metapopulation SEIR transmission model to reported cases stratified by two groups to estimate the impact of a partial lockdown on the effective reproduction number ($$ {\mathcal{R}}_e $$ R e ). We estimated the basic reproduction number ($$ {\mathcal{R}}_0 $$ R 0 ) for the transmission in each group and simulated the potential trajectories of an outbreak from the first recorded case of community transmission until 12 days after the partial lockdown. We estimated $$ {\mathcal{R}}_e $$ R e values of both groups before and after the partial curfew, simulated the effect of these values on the epidemic curves and explored a range of cross-transmission scenarios. Results We estimate $$ {\mathcal{R}}_e $$ R e at 1·08 (95% CI: 1·00–1·26) for P1 and 2·36 (2·03–2·71) for P2. On March 22nd, $$ {\mathcal{R}}_e $$ R e for P1 and P2 are estimated at 1·19 (1·04–1·34) and 1·75 (1·26–2·11) respectively. After the partial curfew had taken effect, $$ {\mathcal{R}}_e $$ R e for P1 dropped modestly to 1·05 (0·82–1·26) but almost doubled for P2 to 2·89 (2·30–3·70). Our simulated epidemic trajectories show that the partial curfew measure greatly reduced and delayed the height of the peak in P1, yet significantly elevated and hastened the peak in P2. Modest cross-transmission between P1 and P2 greatly elevated the height of the peak in P1 and brought it forward in time closer to the peak of P2. Conclusion Our results indicate and quantify how the same lockdown intervention can accentuate disease transmission in some subpopulations while potentially controlling it in others. Any such control may further become compromised in the presence of cross-transmission between subpopulations. Future interventions and policies need to be sensitive to socioeconomic and health disparities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document